Making the Trade-Off between Decision Quality and Information Cost

mal decision-science methods to help us understand the qualA growing problem confronting users of remotely sensed imagery ity of our decisions, as opposed to the conventional standardsis whether the use of additional or different imagery to improve based approaches of the past where acceptable quality levels decision quality is actually justified by its cost. This paper dis- are pre-defined according to commonly used data accuracy cusses how to compare these competing factors so that an ac- standards. ceptable trade-off may be made between them. The proposed Once computed, the application of decision analytical method is based on probabilistic cost-benefit analysis. The measures of uncertainty importance is relatively straightforconcept of “value of information” is introduced in a practical ward, and the use of additional information should only be case study using remote sensing to verify farmers’ declarations employed if the expected benefits to arise from using that inforfor a crop subsidy program in the European Union. Application mation are higher than the associated costs. In turn, the best of the method requires that (1) the problem at hand can be method of information acquisition for the decision to be taken represented by a decision tree, (2) the desirability of each de- is the one that results in the largest positive difference between cision outcome can be expressed numerically, (3) the imagery the expected desirability of the decision outcome and the costs reveals information about the occurrence of events not under involved. This approach is valid for utility-based decision makthe decision maker’s control, and (4) the probabilities of these ing in which decisions are based on the valuation of outcomes events and the extent to which they are detectable in remotely (Morgan and Henrion, 1990, p. 25). sensed imagery can be assessed.

[1]  E. Rasmussen Games and Information , 1989 .

[2]  Max Henrion,et al.  Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis , 1990 .

[3]  R. Lunetta,et al.  Remote sensing and Geographic Information System data integration: error sources and research issues , 1991 .

[4]  Nancy J. Obermeyer,et al.  Taxonomy for surveying the use and value of geographical information! , 1991, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[5]  D. H. Hoekman,et al.  Interpretation of C- and X-band radar images over an agricultural area, the Flevoland test site in the Agriscatt-87 campaign. , 1993 .

[6]  H. W. Trieshmann,et al.  The impact of magnetic resonance imaging of the knee on surgical decision making. , 1996, Arthroscopy : the journal of arthroscopic & related surgery : official publication of the Arthroscopy Association of North America and the International Arthroscopy Association.

[7]  Kimberly M. Thompson,et al.  The Value of Improved National Exposure Information for Perchloroethylene (Perc): A Case Study for Dry Cleaners , 1997 .

[8]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  Game Trees For Decision Analysis , 1998 .

[9]  S. de Bruin,et al.  Integrating spatial statistics and remote sensing , 1998 .

[10]  P. Mumby,et al.  The cost-effectiveness of remote sensing for tropical coastal resources assessment and management , 1999 .

[11]  Jean-Pierre Florens,et al.  Pollution Monitoring: Optimal Design of Inspection. An Economic Analysis of the Use of Satellite Information to Deter Oil Pollution , 1999 .

[12]  S. V. Stehman,et al.  Comparing thematic maps based on map value , 1999 .

[13]  T. Riis,et al.  Quantifying the value of information , 1999 .

[14]  Alfred Stein,et al.  Use of decision trees to value investigation strategies for soil pollution problems , 2000 .

[15]  Lorenzo Bruzzone,et al.  A minimum-cost thresholding technique for unsupervised change detection , 2000 .

[16]  Fernando P. Bernardo,et al.  Inclusion of information costs in process design optimization under uncertainty , 2000 .

[17]  Stephen V. Stehman,et al.  Practical Implications of Design-Based Sampling Inference for Thematic Map Accuracy Assessment , 2000 .

[18]  Arnold Bregt,et al.  Assessing fitness for use: the expected value of spatial data sets , 2001, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..